Europe After the G20 Summit

The G20 summit that ended on July 8 in the German port of Hamburg showed the extent of the gap between the United States, its European allies, and the other members of the G20. There were differences over pursuing a rules-based international trading system and, as expected, over tackling climate change.

U.S. President Donald Trump got what he wanted from the final communiqué, which was agreed just hours before the summit ended. It showed the immense difficulties in finding language that all leaders could sign off on.

Reluctantly, leaders agreed to include in the communiqué America’s decision to withdraw from the Paris Agreement on climate change. If that was not enough, the U.S. delegation also inserted into the text that it would “endeavour to work closely with other countries to help them access and use fossil fuels more cleanly and efficiently.”

German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who hosted the summit, didn’t mince her words about the outcome. “In the end, the negotiations on climate reflect dissent – all against the United States of America,” she told reporters. “And the fact that negotiations on trade were extraordinarily difficult is due to specific positions that the United States has taken,” Merkel added. She could have gone further. The G20 confirmed the fragility of multilateralism and implicitly questioned whether Europe was in a position to strengthen it.

The United States has always swung between multilateralism and unilateralism. But by putting America first, Trump is leading a slow and steady campaign against the institutions that were established after 1945 and have stood the West in good stead.

But not for much longer. China continues to grow economically, politically, and strategically. Its sheer size and strength are already challenging the West. Trump’s trade policies, such as abandoning the Trans-Pacific Partnership, hands China a golden platter.

A disengaged United States could also undermine the rules-based international trading system, unless the European Union becomes strong and united enough to stem the decline of the West. As it is, the decision by Britain to leave the EU has left the bloc politically, economically, and strategically weaker. But this trend could be reversed in several ways.

The first is Merkel’s role. Even though there were no other leaders to give the EU a new sense of direction, Merkel somehow didn’t want to take on that specific role.

This may seem a contradiction in terms. It was the German government that took the lead in the euro crisis through ramming home tough austerity measures for Greece and other indebted eurozone countries. It was Merkel who kept the EU together over imposing and rolling over sanctions on Russia after its annexation of Crimea. And it was Merkel who decided to give security and shelter to nearly 1 million refugees fleeing the wars in Syria and Iraq.

But when it came to setting an agenda for Europe, Merkel has consistently held back. This could now change, because for the first time since taking office in 2005, Merkel has competition. Emmanuel Macron, the Europhile French president, is in a hurry to move Europe forward. This is the second way the EU could halt its decline.

Once the German federal election in September is over, Macron not only intends to revive the Franco-German axis, which has traditionally moved Europe toward more integration. He also wants to hold a series of conventions with other countries. “France must take the initiative. I want to do it thanks to the close cooperation I have already started with the German Chancellor,” Macron said. “By the end of this year, and on this basis, we will launch democratic conventions all across Europe. It will be up to each one of us to sign up to it or not.”

This is important. Macron needs as many allies as possible if he wants a more integrated Europe, economically and politically. In the long term, this effort is about Europe being able to cope with a disengaged United States. It is also about Europe being prepared to protect the values of the West.

That is why the European Commission, the EU’s executive, also has a crucial role to play when it comes to protecting and extending a rules-based international trading system. The trade accord that the EU reached with Japan on the eve of the G20 summit was crucial for both parties. Japan has no illusions about China’s future role in the region and elsewhere. The commission recognizes the huge importance of defending and extending free trade, particularly given Trump’s views on multilateralism.

And that was the major message that came out of the G20 summit: the need to protect multilateral institutions. Yes, these institutions are difficult, cumbersome, bureaucratic, and so reliant on consensus that decisions are often diluted. But going it alone is not an option, even for the United States.

The other message from the summit, and an even more daunting challenge, was the need to make globalization more inclusive. “Globalisation has created challenges and its benefits have not been shared widely enough,” the communiqué stated. The inference was plain for all leaders. Populism is one of the symptoms of globalization.

Macron and Merkel are acutely aware of this. Despite a feel-good factor taking hold in several EU countries, Macron’s election doesn’t mean populism has been put to bed. But it does mean that Europe’s future is back on the agenda.

If Macron is the only chance and escape for Europe to revive its strength vis-a-vis America then I pity Europe. It's not serious, really. And France itself is not in a position to play a unifying role in Europe. Yes, China is a problem but Russia is too, though for different reasons. And to contemplate a new role for Europe nder conditions when the US is growingly disengaging trying to be great again and Russia (part of Europe actually) is sanctioned, when Turkey is getting mad and calls Europe names, the ISIS with its "victims of war" is just around the corner or even deep inside the EU, the African refugees storming Italy, the Europeans erecting walls fencing off each other, the Baltics are in a suicidal moods and getting crazy about Russian interventions soon to occur,, Ukraine is a comlete economic downfall and glorifies the fascist criminals as national heroes including those who exterminated the Poles, Jews and Russians during the war. while Europe silently approves, Poland hails Trump as a saint and refuses to take any migrants at all while in Hamburg Merkel can't disguise her irritation and dislike of America's stance on actually all of the G-20 agenda, when OSCE is in shambles, when climate keeps changing and the Europarliament is full of cantankerious ladies who keep crying wolf without overly understanding why they do that, with the economic disarray and inequality growing even in the midst of Europe, with the EU actually beheaded after Brexit, saying none about the impotence of the UN and the whole world almost surrendering to the US perception of international law (no law at all unless it surves the American national interest, to hell with the UN), while all those incredulous investigations go on and on in Washington picturing America as a scandalous monster before the whole world's eyes. And you want Macron to cope with all that and bring Europe back on track? You are a holy woman, Judy, really!

Post your comments 2500 character limit. No links or markup permitted. Comments are moderated and may not appear immediately. Screen names appear with your comment.

Screen Name

Follow the conversation—Sign up to receive email updates when comments are posted to this article.

Email Address

Characters Used 0

Alexis de Pleshcoy

July 16, 20171:49 pm

It is difficult to start an analysis without defining the concepts referenced.
What is “West”?
In 1914 the West was the suicidal European Empires deciding to unleash a form of suigenocide (Europeans killing each other with genocidal fervor) upon themselves and drag the world into another 30 years of war. Even the Ottoman Empire, a colonial master in Europe until the Balkan Wars is part of the West great game, after all they almost made it beyond Vienna; moreover, they managed to convince the British and French peoples to join them in Jihad for Crimea;even more, the entire Middle East oil was part of the Ottoman Islamic State in 1914.
In 1918 the US became somehow part of the West, with the British Empire being a failed global hegemon, unable to avoid the second act of the war. It took incredible geopolitical incompetence to get the Wehrmacht just nautical miles of Dover.
The United Nations and especially Bretton Woods made the world we know now. A little-known Mount Pelerin Society set the foundations for globalization, fueled by Bretton Woods.
On this foundation, the world changed and kept changing, with massive transfer of technology and eventually wealth to the East.
When Kissinger went to China it is hard to believe that he envisioned that in a generation China will get from oxen cart to quantum radars, and high-speed trains powered OBOR/BRI, paid with AIIB money.
Looking at the G20 countries, their GDP, their population, the projections in terms of GDP (especially PPP), projections of population growth, it is clear that soon the West will simply be of limited relevance.
What better proof than the enthusiasm everybody signed on for OBOR/BRI, AIIB? The speed the EU concluded trade agreements with Canada and Japan?
As a separate comment, there is no such thing as free trade. It is negotiated trade, trade blocs, WTO and so on. TPP was not in any way acceptable for the US middle class, in its format; it was mostly a geopolitical treaty, targeting India in the long run. TTIP made far more sense, and it should have been negotiated a long time ago; it makes no sense for the US to be ready to be incinerated for the Fuld gap, but have trade taxes. Moreover, a free movement of people between EU and US would have made perfect sense, opening access to EU universities and engineering; IB and PISA would have fueled the rise of the educational system.
It would have been beneficial if at least this G20 would be a forum capable of stopping war, but that is a distant dream.

Comment Policy

Comments that include profanity, personal attacks, or other inappropriate material will be removed. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, steps will be taken to block users who violate any of the posting standards, terms of use, privacy policies, or any other policies governing this site. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.